Navigation

The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us.

Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help end theism, dogma, violence, hatred, and other irrationality. Buy an Xbox 360 -- PS3 -- Laptop -- Apple

Now I'm not saying that you guys are definitely wrong with your beliefs. I believe them to be wrong and I think the evidence supports the existence of God. But, even in the absense of evidence (hard evidence) I believe that one can believe in God and still be rational. Or, that by being rational they can come to the conclusion that God exists.
To claim that one is irrational if they believe in God sounds quite broad and insultive. I understand that if one would want to get people onto an idea they might not be as successful if they take a more modest approach; but if that's the consequence of honest, intellectual discovery then so be it.
It seems as if you don't even consider the possibility that you could be wrong with your views. I certainly do that with mine. That's part of the reason why I came to your site. But, when the opposing view point is as polemical & fundamentalist as the seemingly 'irrational' fundamentalists that they deride I have to question their intellectual integrity.

What usually happens is it just inflames the opposition to be that much more unwilling to hear what you have to say; further entrenching both sides to their initial assumption.
Am I close-minded because I believe that God exists?
I believe that it was due to being open-minded that I came to believe in the existence of God.

But, even in the absense of evidence (hard evidence) I believe that one can believe in God and still be rational.

No, one can't. Not with respect to the existence of God. You're falling into a trap by using the phrase "hard evidence." What you think you mean is that there's enough circumstantial evidence to prove that god exists, and that that ought to be enough.

What if I asked you to believe that I can read minds? I can prove it. I'll do several demonstrations with other people that will prove that I can read minds, and then I will ask you to believe. The fact is, I could seem to read other people's minds for hours, and could do this day in and day out for weeks, and at the end, you would say, "Ok, it seems like you can read minds, but I am skeptical because according to what I know of science, there is no evidence that mind reading is possible."

You'd be correct to question. I could appear to mind-read through all sorts of manipulations, and you would be foolish to believe me. Even if I wrote books about mind reading and became a New York Times bestseller, I'd still not be telling the truth.

It's the same with god, only for you it isn't. You believe in God based on pure heresay and circumstantial evidence, without one shred of scientific evidence to back up your belief. Not only that, you are content to do it without demanding real evidence. A person who believes in God and follows science in other areas of his life is irrational.

Sorry.

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

Now I'm not saying that you guys are definitely wrong with your beliefs.

Thats good because atheism is not a belief, rather it's a lack of one.

Quote:

I believe them to be wrong and I think the evidence supports the existence of God. But, even in the absense of evidence (hard evidence) I believe that one can believe in God and still be rational. Or, that by being rational they can come to the conclusion that God exists.

It's more likely than not that you haven't examined the arguments against such nonsense. How could a rational person believe in something for which no evidence exists? The only possible answer I can think of is that he grew up with and has never serioulsy considered the alternative to his beliefs or he has an emotional need to hold onto the fairy tale.

Quote:

o claim that one is irrational if they believe in God sounds quite broad and insultive.

To call yourself rational and still believe in a god is insultive to me as the two are mutually exclusive.

Quote:

I understand that if one would want to get people onto an idea they might not be as successful if they take a more modest approach; but if that's the consequence of honest, intellectual discovery then so be it.
It seems as if you don't even consider the possibility that you could be wrong with your views.

I for one grew up with such beliefs but overcame them. From what I have seen here, most others did also, so we are quite familiar with your beliefs and have thought them threw very carefully before discarding them.

Quote:

I certainly do that with mine. That's part of the reason why I came to your site. But, when the opposing view point is as polemical & fundamentalist as the seemingly 'irrational' fundamentalists that they deride I have to question their intellectual integrity.

What usually happens is it just inflames the opposition to be that much more unwilling to hear what you have to say; further entrenching both sides to their initial assumption.
Am I close-minded because I believe that God exists?

Probably.

Quote:

I believe that it was due to being open-minded that I came to believe in the existence of God.

Not likely. More likely you were indoctrinated from an early age.

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. - Seneca

I am very open minded to the possibility of their being a god, a god-like figure, etc, but only when there is some sort of proof for one. I don't need 'hard evidence' as you put it, just scientific proof. I am open minded, just not so open my brain falls out. Rational people can and do believe in a personal god, but they aren't being rational about that particular belief. Society says those that speak to space aliens or can see Santa Claus are not considered seriously. They have no proof, but they can try to show you why they think it is true. Here is a better example. Are you open to the possibility of converting to Islam? You know what it is like to be an atheist in respect to other people's religion. Here is one better. How about the Greek Gods, they are just as plausible as say the Christian God. You don't, because you consider them irrational, and just wrong. And yet, you are so certain that this time, you are correct. We don't see the distinction of christian beliefs, islamic beliefs, or ancient greeks. Like every other part of my life, I want reasonable proof before I believe something to be true, no matter how wonderful it might be. That is why I am open-minded.

To the OP, with all due respect: you forget that many of us were raised religious and did once look at things from the religious point of view. So we did have a mindset that accepted what we were taught.

As you grow up, though, you start to look at the world and question more. You read, you get an idea of other cultures, you even hear--gasp!-- that other cultures think about God in a way that is nothing like yours. Now, how could that be, if you have the truth?

The answer is, you don't.

You have a storybook of talking donkeys and people rising from the grave and other such nonsense. You learn that none of what you were taught reflects history and science.

And you wake up.

Oh, by the way, what you did in your first post is called an "ad hominem." It's not going to win you many friends.